V.-» APHC010405252025 ■j IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESI« AT AMARAVATI fq || ■ ,4# m ,{■ -D:; u . !</ «'-it W/ r: ■ SX'^A WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2027 of 2025 Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the Order dated 29.04.2025 passed in I.A.No.1120 of 2022 in O.S.No.623 of 2018, on the file of III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. > Between: 1. Srihari Educational Society, (Registered Society under Registration Act bearing No. 122/2009) Rep. by its President, Sri G. Vijaya Bharathi W/o Guttireddy Subba Reddy, aged 48 Balaji Nagar, Kadapa city, YSR Kadapa District. 2. Srihari Educational Society, (Registered Society under Registration Act bearing No. 122/2009) Rep. by its Secretary-cum-Correspondent, Sri Guttireddy Subba Reddy, S/o G.Pulla Reddy, aged 48 years R/o.D.No.45/290-10, Balaji Nagar, Kadapa city, YSR Kadapa District. ...Petitioners/Defendants 1 & 2/Respondents AND 1. Mooramreddy Raja Reddy, S/o M. Gangi Reddy, aged Business, R/o D.No.39-340-2, Vivekananda Nagar, Kadapa City, YSR Kadapa District. R/o.D.No.45/290-10, years. > 52 years » 2. Mooramreddy Rajeswari, W/o M.Raja Reddy, aged 51 R/o D.No.39-340-2. Vivekananda Nagar. Kadapa City, YSR Kadapa District. years. Business, / / ...Respondents/Plaintiffs 1 & 2/Petitloners lA NO: 1 OF 2()9fi Petition under Section 151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fiied in support of the petition, the High Court may be pieased to grant stay of all further proceedings in O.S.No.623 of 2018 on the file of Hon'ble III Additional Junior Civii Judge, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. Counsel for the Petitioners : Smt. M Siva Jyothi Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared The Court made the following order: / APHC010405252025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) lU [3329] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2027/2025 Between: 1.SRIHARI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, (REGISTERED SOCIETY UNDER REP. BY ITS REGISTRATION ACT BEARING NO. 122/2009) PRESIDENT, SRI G. VIJAYA BHARATHI, W/0 GUTTIREDDY SUBBA REDDY, AGED 48 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.45/290-10, BALAJI NAGAR, KADAPA CITY. YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2.SRIHARI EDUCATIONALSOCIETY, (REGISTERED SOCIETY UNDER REGISTRATION ACT BEARING NO. 122/2009) SECRETARY-CUM-CORRESPONDENT, SRI GUTTIREDDY SUBBA REDDY, S/0 G.PUIIA REDDY. AGED 48 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.45/290- 10, BALAJI NAGAR, KADAPA CITY, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) REP. BY ITS AND 1.MOORAMREDDY RAJA REDDY, S/0 M. GANGI REDDY, AGED 52 YEARS. BUSINESS. 2. 2.MOORAMREDDY RAJESWARI, W/0 M.RAJA REDDY YEARS, BUSINESS. BOTH ARE R/0 D.NO.39-340-2, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR KADAPA CITY, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT AGED 51 ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased toThe above named Petitioners beg to present this Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition having been aggrieved by the Order dated 29.04.2025 \ 2 pas^d in I.A.No.1120 of 2022 in O.S.No.623 of 2018, on the file of Honble III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa for the following among other lA NO: 1 OF 202^ Pehtion under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased leased to grant stay of all further proceedings in O.S.No.623 of 2018 on the file of Hon’ble III Additional Junior Civil Judge and pass s Counsel for the Petitioner{S): 1.M SIVA JYOTHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2027/2025 ORDER: The present Civil Revision Petition is filed assailing the docket order dated 29.04.2025 in I.A.No.1120 of 2022 in O.S.No.623 of 2018 on the file of IN Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa. 2. The petitioners herein are defendants and the respondents herein are plaintiffs in the suit i.e., O.S.No.623 of 2018. For convenience of the Court the parties referred in this Revisions Petition referred as it is. 3. The case of the petitioners herein is that the respondents herein/plaintiffs filed I.A.No.1120 of 2022 seeking for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to carry out measurements and to record the physical features of their respective properties as mentioned at the schedule of their title deeds. For which, the petitioners herein also filed a counter-affidavit . 4. After considering the claims of both the parties, the trial court was pleased to pass an order dated 02.04.2024 in I.A.No.1120 of 2022, which is extracted hereunder: “In the result, this petition is allowed and Advocate Commissioner is appointed to visit the suit schedule property and to measure the properties of both parties with reference to their title deeds, draw a sketch to file the report and to note physical features with the assistance of Municipal Surveyor, with reference to their title deeds. Sri T.S. Range Nayakulu is 4 appointed as Advocate Commissioner to visit the suit schedule property and to measure the properties of both parties with reference to their title deeds, draw a sketch to file the report and to note physical features with the assistance of Municipal Surveyor, with reference to their title deeds and other revenue records, as the Advocate Commissioner fee is fixed at Rs.3,000/- be payable by the petitioner. For filing of commissioner report call on 02.05.2024. Issue Commissioner Warrant Accordingly. ” 5. Pursuant to the appointment of the Advocate Commissioner, the Advocate Commissioner measured the extent of land and also note down the physical features and submitted an interim commissioner report dated 25.11.2024, wherein he observed as under; ‘‘Further I submit that I am ready to execute the warrant of commission against to measure the properties of both petitioners and respondents which are in existence according to their title deeds with assistance of Municipal Surveyor without basing on any revenue records such as FMB and Sub Division Records of Survey No.559/2E, if the Hon’ble Court permits me on comply of objections raised by them particularly advocate for respondents as stipulated in my report. ” 6. Pursuant to the interim report of the Advocate Commissioner, the petitioners herein filed objections stating that the measurements/surveyby the Advocate Commissioner was proceeded with the assistance of Municipal Surveyor but not as per the revenue records and also without therebeing any FMB and they proceeded basing upon the recitals of schedule property of the 5 title deeds. Moreover, even in the absence of any measurements at the schedule of title deeds they proceeded and concluded the survey. Further the petitioners herein requested to conduct survey afresh basing upon the revenue records and as per FMB duly prepared by the revenue authorities for accurate measurements and physical features of the schedule properties. But without considering the objections of the petitioners, the trial court proceeded as if the survey was conducted with due procedure and passed the impugned docket order dated 29.04.2025 directing the Advocate Commissioner to file his final report by executing the warrant and posted the matter on 14.05.2025. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the petitioners herein are seeking only for the survey should be conducted basing upon the revenue records and FMB with the assistance of Mandal Surveyor rather than Municipal Surveyor or Deputy Surveyor from the office of the District Survey and Land Records. She further submits that in the absence of any measurements at the schedule property of the title deeds and after the title deeds a bund road was laid through the lands of respondents/plai ntiffs without setting apart the subject land occupied by the road, the clear measurements and extent cannot be carved out by way of measuring the property basing upon the schedule of title deed of the respondents/plaintiffs. Therefore, the impugned docket order of the trial court dated 29.04.2025 is liable to be interfered to cure the discrepancies. 8. On perusal of the order of the trial court dated 02.04.2024, it is clearly and categorically shows that an Advocate Commissioner was appointed to 6 visit the suit schedule property and to measure the properties of both parties with reference to their title deeds scheduled properties and draw a sketch to file the report and to note physical features with the Surveyor, with reference to their title deeds Therefore, the Advocate Commissioner shall with the help of title deeds as well assistance of Municipal and other revenue records. proceed for conducting survey as revenue records available in respect of the subject survey number. Further the interim report of the Advocate Commissioner without taking help of revenue records and proceeded with the survey basing upon the schedules of the title deeds which do not contain any measurements in respect of survey No.559-2E may lead to discrepancy and jeopardize to the parties to the suit. Moreover, the dispute between the parties may not be determined in proper perspective, if the per the schedules of title deeds. Therefore, the docket order trial court basing upon the interim report for finalization of the Advocate Commissioner may cause irreparable loss to the parties Further, after acquisition of title deeds, it is contended that a bund road was laid through the respondents/plaintiffs’ schedule land be set apart as per the revenue records only. survey was proceeded as passed by the warrant of the to the suit. as such the same can 9. In view of the reasons stated above, this Court is inclined to set aside the docket order dated 29.04.2025 passed by the trial court by remanding the matter for fresh consideration by Commissioner Hence, the as directed hereunder. Advocate Commissioner is survey/measure/identify the schedule properties of the petitioners directed to conduct as well as 7 the respondents with the help of the revenue records/FMB and also with the help of Mandal Surveyor qualified Municipal Surveyor if any or Survey Inspector from the office of the District Survey and Land Records by following due process as contemplated under the Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923. The entire exercise shall be completed by the Advocate Commissioner, within a period of three(3) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and submit report to the trial court as per the directions of the trial court dated 02.04.2024. 10. With the above directions, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT ^ISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The III Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. 2. Sri T.S.Ranganayakulu, Advocate Commissioner, III Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kadapa, (through III Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kadapa, to serve the order copy to Advocate Commissioner). 3. One CC to Smt M Siva Jyothi, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies TK sree \ HIGH COURT DATED:13/08/2025 \ ORDER CRP No.2027 of 2025 0 A SEP 2025 )i!) ^sCanwrtSKfoiiX^ DISPOSING OF THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION WITHOUT COSTS